DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate • Hacker News Board

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#281

Post by kuschku » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:01 PM UTC

91bananas wrote: post #132

kuschku wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the cheaper 3D printers are mostly chinese, Prusa is still a non-chinese option :)

While this is true and I own a Prusa MK4, they're so behind it's not even funny.

That depends entirely on your definition of "behind".

The MK4 delivers pretty much the same quality at the same speed as the P1P.

Paying 30% more to get an open-source, fully modular, fully repairable and customizable product that's made sustainably with fair wages is not a huge markup.

I'd gladly pay 30% more to get an Android phone that's fully modular, open-source, repairable, upgradable and made in the EU.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#282

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:01 PM UTC

gandalfgeek wrote: post #265

Keep seeing DJI drones at local police dept open houses. They even have a "drone unit" that specializes in SAR, hazardous recon type scenarios. Given extensive existing use throughout US local law enforcement, fire depts etc, not sure if this will actually happen. Or maybe they all mass-migrate to Anduril solutions?

I know a state police drone pilot. There are 6 people on the team.

They use Mavic 2A and 3 drones for thermal. Mostly surveillance.

They use DJI Avata for whipping through a house faster than people can. They use this for hostage and other possibly dangerous scenarios.

I know for a fact they are often breaking the FAA laws on lights and line of sight. They don’t care because they’re “good guys”.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#283

Post by drra » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:01 PM UTC

kuschku wrote: post #260

unethical_ban wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard offhand here that the ease of starting a business in general is easier in the US and that funding for tech startups is more available in the US due to policy. Totally hearsay from me.

Regulation isn't going to stop innovation that much, or the tech industry wouldn't be in california. The primary difference is that the US is one homogenous, huge market. If I build something in California, to California's laws, and it becomes a success, I can immediately sell it across the entire rest of the US, and I can expand across the US, using the same employment contracts as in california, same lawyers as in…

Also since national markets in Europe are relatively big by themselves a lot of companies tend to be satisfied with comfort of a single market success.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#284

Post by darby_nine » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:03 PM UTC

questhimay wrote: post #264

henvic wrote: post #28

DJI is, by far, the best drone equipment brand for photography, industrial usage, etc. It's disheartening to witness the US embracing protectionism for high-tech. If the United States does this, it might as well join the European Union's decadence in killing tech startups by stifling the competitiveness of their market...

[dead]

none of this insight will help america compete with china. at first blush it seems like instead we're cutting ourselves off at the ankle.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#285

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:03 PM UTC

debacle wrote: post #223

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sicker thing to me is how she (like many) was actually relatively moderate until she completely hitched her wagon onto the Trump train. Another Profile in Cowardice. An overview: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/women-rule/2023/01/06/t... All of these politicians who have these completely transactional relationships, I just find utterly gross. I mean, do they have any actual friends? For example, Trump comple…

Not sure why you are being downmodded. Stefanik touts herself as a MAGA princess, but she's nothing but a grifter.

She’s a New York Republican, don’t assign anything to her with strong conviction.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#286

Post by dji4321234 » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:03 PM UTC

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #218

burnte wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the control apps tap into GPS so they know when you're in a restricted zone, the gov't could simply make them mark all of the US as a restricted zone and the drone will never fly. I have one, I'm not happy about this.

This would have to come from the firmware in the drone looking up what the no-fly zones were. GPS is transmit-only location, it can't write no-fly zone data to a particular drone. The drone would look it up through a connected cell phone using a web service like this: https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr_map_ims/html/ I think (hope) it would be a hard sell to send different data from faa.gov to DJI drone lookups versus other bran…

DJI's no-fly zone database is completely independent from the US government. DJI would have to be compelled to add the US as a no-fly zone, which, if their drones are banned already, seems like a rather difficult thing to compel as there's no carrot at the end of the stick.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#287

Post by mrtksn » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:03 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #268

mrtksn wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obsession with pricing the stock is not healthy. According to western reports, China is at least 15 years ahead of US in Nuclear for example: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-many-15-years-beh... Or public infrastructure, or transportation, or electric cars etc. US is stil ahead in some stuff but the list is getting smaller as the market caps getting bigger and people "richer".

>Obsession with pricing the stock is not healthy. I'm not claiming it is, just that it's far more objective and far less fudgeable than the alternatives. >According to western reports, China is at least 15 years ahead of US in Nuclear for example: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-many-15-years-beh ... >Or public infrastructure, or transportation, or electric cars etc. Arguably all of those is more due to go…

Right, China achieve all this thanks to its libertarian low touch low regulation small government and only if the stock prices of the American companies go a bit higher and the government is a tad less regulated they will do even better than the Chinese.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#288

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:04 PM UTC

kotaKat wrote: post #168

KerrAvon wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you need a backgrounder on Stefanik, she got elected before Trump, decided she preferred staying in DC to her hometown, sold out her previously-stated principles almost immediately when she saw a chance to gain power, and is now doing as much damage to civil liberties as Nixon and McCarthy ever managed: https://theracket.news/p/stop-going-stefanik-committee-fools She doesn't care about whether the bill does so…

I'll add more as a NY21 local: I've never seen her. I've never heard from her locally. You can't fucking find Elise. It's all events in the past. There's never been a townhall up in this portion of her region. Bonus: Her husband is a lobbyist for a leading gun industry trade group. https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Stefanik-s-husband-K...

Her husband has lobbied for NSSF… Why is that bad?

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#289

Post by kuschku » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:05 PM UTC

drra wrote: post #283

kuschku wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulation isn't going to stop innovation that much, or the tech industry wouldn't be in california. The primary difference is that the US is one homogenous, huge market. If I build something in California, to California's laws, and it becomes a success, I can immediately sell it across the entire rest of the US, and I can expand across the US, using the same employment contracts as in california, same lawyers as in…

Also since national markets in Europe are relatively big by themselves a lot of companies tend to be satisfied with comfort of a single market success.

And once you've got control of one EU country, expanding to another EU country is just as complicated as expanding to the US is.

So if you're spending the same effort anyway, expanding to the US with 300 million people is much more profitable than expanding to Germany with 80 million people, or the Netherlands with 20 million people.

Which is why Spotify became available in Sweden, the US, and the rest of the EU in that order.

Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate

#290

Post by bri3d » Mon, Jun 17, 2024, 6:05 PM UTC

merpnderp wrote: post #243

bri3d wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High volume single-use drones and DJI drones are almost completely orthogonal in terms of technology, production, and procurement. The only thing they really share is MEMS gyroscopes and brushless motor windings. Making a million FPV bomb drones and making a million consumer camera drones are such dramatically different tasks that there is not a chance this theory holds water.

You should look at see what kind of drones are dominating Ukraine's skies. You'd see some water being held. And you probably should have googled this before making this comment.

I'm quite familiar with this space, thanks :)

DJI drones are being used in significantly lower quantities as "base stations" and long-range reconnaissance applications, with the occasional bomb-dropping side run.

FPV drones are being used in much, much, much higher quantity than DJI drones, owing to their massively lower cost to produce due to ... the simpler and mostly orthogonal supply chain!

Financing a consumer/enterprise camera drone production capability with an end goal of enabling the construction of large quantities of one-way FPV drones, as the parent post to mine suggested, would not be a good strategy, IMO.

Having domestic consumer/enterprise camera drone production capability at all is of course a good idea, but the quantity needed in war fighting is significantly lower, at least with the current tools and techniques seen in Ukraine.